Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 376 Pa. Super. 146 - MacKey v. MacKey

376 Pa. Super. 146 - MacKey v. MacKey’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
2
states following
August 2004
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently August 2004

20 state decisions

160198819902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on 318 Pa. Super. 311 - Wolk v. Wolk · 341 Pa. Super. 76 - Flynn v. Flynn · 352 Pa. Super. 432 - Miller v. Miller · 335 Pa. Super. 41 - Thomas v. Thomas · 348 Pa. Super. 237 - Fenstermaker v. Fenstermaker

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “It shall be lawful for the court to grant a divorce where a complaint has been filed alleging that the marriage is irretrievably broken and an affidavit has been filed alleging that the parties have lived separate and apart for a period of at least two (2) years, and that the marriage is irretrievably broken, and: (i) the respondent does not deny the allegation set forth in the affidavit or (ii) the respondent denies one or more of the allegations set forth in the affidavit, but after notice and hearing, the court determines that the parties have lived separate and apart for a period of at least two (2) years and that the marriage is irretrievably broken. 2”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “For certain, the parties have shared some common household expenses, occupied common living spaces, visited family members together and occasionally entertained mutual friends at their residence. However, Mr. Mackey should not be denied a unilateral divorce merely because he and his wife have demon strated a level of civility rarely seen in a divorce action.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Thus, the gravamen of the phrase “separate and apart” becomes the existence of separate lives not separate roofs (citations omitted). This position follows the trend of Pennsylvania case law in which a common residence is not a bar to showing that the parties live separate and apart ...”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.